"What you get married for if you don't want children?"

I suppose I'm in favour to the law being changed to allow Catholics to succeed to the throne and abolish the preference for a male heir. After all, the laws they're proposing to get rid of are sexist and discriminatory. But then again, the whole institution is discriminatory from top to bottom and back to front, so another part of me just shrugs, and thinks "I thought you liked discrimination - why else would you want a monarchy in the first place?"

No one seems to be suggesting that anyone other than direct descendants of James I's granddaughter will be eligible for the job, or that it shouldn't be decided on ageist (i.e. primogenitary) principles. There's certainly not a hint that either competence or a willingness to take it on should be factors in the choice. And this is bringing the monarchy up to date how?

As so often with matters monarchical, I Just Don't Get It.

"What you get married for if you don't want children?"

I suppose I'm in favour to the law being changed to allow Catholics to succeed to the throne and abolish the preference for a male heir. After all, the laws they're proposing to get rid of are sexist and discriminatory. But then again, the whole institution is discriminatory from top to bottom and back to front, so another part of me just shrugs, and thinks "I thought you liked discrimination - why else would you want a monarchy in the first place?"

No one seems to be suggesting that anyone other than direct descendants of James I's granddaughter will be eligible for the job, or that it shouldn't be decided on ageist (i.e. primogenitary) principles. There's certainly not a hint that either competence or a willingness to take it on should be factors in the choice. And this is bringing the monarchy up to date how?

As so often with matters monarchical, I Just Don't Get It.